Michigan State Spartans at Wisconsin Badgers college football matchup
- Kickoff
- Sat, Oct 3
- Time TBA
- Venue
- Wisconsin home
- Camp Randall Stadium
- Captured market
- Line not posted
- No verified spread
- Player model
- 19 players
- preseason · cfb-fantasy-quantile-2026.1
Michigan State visits Wisconsin in Week 5.
Michigan State travels to Wisconsin at Camp Randall Stadium. No sourced spread is attached to this game yet, so the page does not infer a favorite.
The published player model covers 19 featured skill players in this matchup. Its highest median fantasy forecasts belong to Colton Joseph (WIS), Cam Edwards (MSU), and Cam Fancher (MSU).
Market pending
There is no verified spread for this matchup in the committed snapshot.
Player projection coverage
19 player distributions are available, led by Colton Joseph (WIS).
Venue context
Wisconsin is the designated home team at Camp Randall Stadium.
cfb-fantasy-quantile-2026.1 · preseason
As of 2026-08-13T21:35:03+00:00No favorite inferred
context onlyPreseason model
As of 2026-08-13T21:35:03+00:00Unit ledger
Every bar rewards the better low-number rank, while exact values stay visible for both teams.
Unit edges from the 2025 charting
Offense units paired against the defense units they will face, from snap-weighted 2025 PFF grades, national ranks, and returning-snap shares. Historical form, never a game prediction.
Each offense unit paired against the defense unit it will actually face, using 2025 snap-weighted PFF grades and national ranks, with returning-snap caveats where an edge rests on departed players. Measured history, not a game prediction.
Michigan State pass protection vs Wisconsin pass rush
Michigan State's pass protection graded 58.3 in 2025 (118th of 136); Wisconsin's pass rush graded 69.0 (27th). On 2025 form that is a clear edge for Wisconsin's pass rush. Wisconsin's pass rush returns only 24.0% of those snaps, so the edge rests on departed production.
Wisconsin pass protection vs Michigan State pass rush
Wisconsin's pass protection graded 62.3 in 2025 (96th of 136); Michigan State's pass rush graded 62.2 (109th). On 2025 form this pairing is effectively a push.
Michigan State receiving corps vs Wisconsin coverage
Michigan State's receiving corps graded 67.7 in 2025 (21st of 136); Wisconsin's coverage graded 60.1 (112th). On 2025 form that is a clear edge for Michigan State's receiving corps.
Wisconsin receiving corps vs Michigan State coverage
Wisconsin's receiving corps graded 64.3 in 2025 (71st of 136); Michigan State's coverage graded 65.7 (51st). On 2025 form that is a modest edge for Michigan State's coverage. Michigan State's coverage returns only 21.0% of those snaps, so the edge rests on departed production.
Michigan State rush offense vs Wisconsin run defense
Michigan State's rush offense graded 74.6 in 2025 (76th of 136); Wisconsin's run defense graded 68.3 (54th). On 2025 form that is a modest edge for Wisconsin's run defense.
Wisconsin rush offense vs Michigan State run defense
Wisconsin's rush offense graded 68.3 in 2025 (128th of 136); Michigan State's run defense graded 64.2 (110th). On 2025 form that is a modest edge for Michigan State's run defense. Michigan State's run defense returns only 20.0% of those snaps, so the edge rests on departed production.
Where the player model concentrates
The two highest median model players for each side. Context-only prior and baseline rows are excluded.
League projected stat lines
Means and 20th–80th percentile ranges for every published model player; missing stats stay missing.
Michigan State
10 League projections| Player | Pos | Fantasy pts | Pass yds | Rush yds | Receptions | Rec yds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cam EdwardsELITE · Tier 2 | RB | 19.27.6–26.2 | — | 7226–102 | 2.50.9–3.8 | 160–22 |
| Cam FancherHIGH CEILING · Tier 5 | QB | 15.16.3–27.5 | 15771–243 | 407–64 | — | — |
| Alessio Milivojevicbalanced · Tier 5 | QB | 14.35.2–23.9 | 202106–268 | — | — | — |
| Chrishon McCrayHIGH CEILING · Tier 6 | WR | 10.43.5–16.2 | — | — | 3.61.0–6.1 | 4713–68 |
| Marvis Parrishbalanced · Tier 6 | RB | 10.03.1–17.1 | — | 4615–78 | 1.80.0–3.3 | — |
| Jameel Gardner Jr.ELITE · Tier 6 | WR | 9.32.9–14.8 | — | — | 3.11.0–4.8 | 3812–57 |
| Rodney Bullard Jr.HIGH CEILING · Tier 6 | WR | 7.52.2–13.9 | — | — | 2.51.1–3.7 | 3410–61 |
| Brandon TullisHIGH CEILING · Tier 6 | RB | 8.42.2–13.0 | — | 357–56 | — | — |
| KK SmithVOLATILE · Tier 6 | WR | 7.12.0–11.7 | — | — | 2.51.0–3.9 | 288–42 |
| Jay CoyneWeekly model | FB | 5.71.4–9.5 | — | — | — | — |
Wisconsin
9 League projections| Player | Pos | Fantasy pts | Pass yds | Rush yds | Receptions | Rec yds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Colton JosephHIGH CEILING · Tier 5 | QB | 22.38.0–30.5 | 169107–226 | 6721–107 | — | — |
| Darrion DupreeELITE · Tier 6 | RB | 9.83.1–15.0 | — | 4312–72 | — | — |
| Abu Sama IIIbalanced · Tier 6 | RB | 9.53.0–13.8 | — | 4615–82 | — | — |
| Carter SmithELITE · Tier 6 | QB | 8.91.4–17.1 | — | — | — | — |
| Shamar Rigbybalanced · Tier 6 | WR | 8.82.6–12.8 | — | — | 3.01.0–4.5 | 4011–56 |
| Jacob HarrisVOLATILE · Tier 6 | TE | 7.92.5–11.5 | — | — | 2.71.0–4.0 | 3810–53 |
| Zion KearneySAFE FLOOR · Tier 6 | WR | 6.42.1–10.3 | — | — | 2.61.0–3.8 | 329–49 |
| Bryan Jackson IIbalanced · Tier 6 | RB | 6.31.0–10.8 | — | — | — | — |
| Malachi ColemanSAFE FLOOR · Tier 6 | WR | 6.31.8–10.0 | — | — | — | 277–37 |
Michigan State
- Rush yds
- 72
- Receptions
- 2.5
- Rec yds
- 16
- Pass yds
- 157
- Rush yds
- 40
- Pass yds
- 202
- Receptions
- 3.6
- Rec yds
- 47
- Rush yds
- 46
- Receptions
- 1.8
- Receptions
- 3.1
- Rec yds
- 38
- Receptions
- 2.5
- Rec yds
- 34
- Rush yds
- 35
- Receptions
- 2.5
- Rec yds
- 28
Wisconsin
- Pass yds
- 169
- Rush yds
- 67
- Rush yds
- 43
- Rush yds
- 46
- Receptions
- 3.0
- Rec yds
- 40
- Receptions
- 2.7
- Rec yds
- 38
- Receptions
- 2.6
- Rec yds
- 32
- Rec yds
- 27
The League does not publish a game-side, total, or moneyline prediction without a validated game-market model.
Generated Aug 13, 5:35 PM EDT · collegefootballdata · Player outcomes are ranges, not guarantees. No game-side, total, or moneyline prediction is inferred.
Props to compare after a line posts
Model ranges are not recommendations. No player-prop line or price is captured in this artifact.
| Player | Market | Projection | Median | 20th–80th | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Colton JosephQB · WIS | Passing yards | 169.4 | 173.3 | 107.4–225.5 | Shop the line |
| Cam EdwardsRB · MSU | Rushing yards | 72.3 | 61.3 | 25.9–101.9 | Shop the line |
| Cam FancherQB · MSU | Passing yards | 156.9 | 175.4 | 71.3–243.4 | Shop the line |
| Alessio MilivojevicQB · MSU | Passing yards | 201.9 | 202.8 | 105.5–268.2 | Shop the line |
| Chrishon McCrayWR · MSU | Receiving yards | 47.0 | 38.3 | 12.7–67.9 | Shop the line |
| Marvis ParrishRB · MSU | Rushing yards | 45.5 | 43.4 | 14.6–77.7 | Shop the line |
Passing yards
- Projection
- 169.4
- Median
- 173.3
- 20th–80th
- 107.4–225.5
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Rushing yards
- Projection
- 72.3
- Median
- 61.3
- 20th–80th
- 25.9–101.9
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Passing yards
- Projection
- 156.9
- Median
- 175.4
- 20th–80th
- 71.3–243.4
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Passing yards
- Projection
- 201.9
- Median
- 202.8
- 20th–80th
- 105.5–268.2
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Receiving yards
- Projection
- 47.0
- Median
- 38.3
- 20th–80th
- 12.7–67.9
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Rushing yards
- Projection
- 45.5
- Median
- 43.4
- 20th–80th
- 14.6–77.7
- Status
- Shop the line
No captured player-prop line. Compare the model range only after a market posts.
Methodology and data boundary
Schedule and venue facts come from the committed ESPN 2026 catalog. Spreads are dated market snapshots, prioritizing DraftKings where available. Player stat lines and fantasy ranges come only from the versioned weekly CFB quantile model; prior and baseline context do not enter this page. Missing data stays missing.
- Line snapshot
- No line
- Model update
- Aug 13, 5:35 PM EDT
- Game prediction
- Not validated